A new season, a new generation of Formula 1 cars, and a routing of the opposition. This year?óÔé¼Ôäós Australian Grand Prix had much in common with the 1998 race. F1 Fanatic guest writer Andrew Tsvyk tells the story.

During the presentation of McLaren?óÔé¼Ôäós newest Formula 1 challenger on January 16th, Ron Dennis announced his retirement from the team. This was not entirely a surprise for the F1 community, as rumours of Dennis quitting had been in the air for a year or so. Lewis Hamilton?óÔé¼Ôäós championship success gave Dennis a wonderful opportunity to end his F1 career on a high and he took it.

During his ultra-successful McLaren tenure career, which spanned almost three decades, Dennis tasted great success and bitter acrimony. The 1998 Australian Grand Prix mixed both.

Back on top

1998 was the year McLaren returned to their winning ways. The seeds of the team?óÔé¼Ôäós recovery after three winless season were sown when Dennis succeeded in tempting Mercedes-Benz away from Sauber, and Adrian Newey away from Williams.

McLaren-Mercedes got their third season together off to a winning start as David Coulthard produced arguably the biggest sensation of 1997 by winning the season-opening Australian Grand Prix. The West-sponsored McLarens won two more races that season, signalling that the outfit from Woking was heading in the right direction.

Things improved for the silver arrows the following year, as Newey built the blindingly fast MP4/13, adapting it perfectly to the sweeping rule changes (such as the reduction of the car?óÔé¼Ôäós width and the introduction of grooved tyres). Newey?óÔé¼Ôäós creation dominated pre-season testing. McLaren?óÔé¼Ôäós performance of the curtain-raising Australian Grand Prix left few people surprised. Nevertheless, the race itself was far from trouble-free for the team.

Qualifying produced the widely expected all-McLaren front row, with Mika Hakkinen ahead of David Coulthard by 0.043s, while third place went to Michael Schumacher?óÔé¼Ôäós Ferrari. After a disgraceful defeat in Jerez, Schumacher was hoping that his team had finally beaten a car to rival Williams. However, with Renault ceasing engine supply at the end of 1997, Williams were no longer the leaders.

Easy one-two

When the red lights went off the McLaren drivers had a strong get away and were able to keep their positions. Schumacher stayed third, made a bid to pass Coulthard when the McLaren clipped the grass exiting turn two but fell back.

Hakkinen completed the opening lap 1.5s ahead of Coulthard, with Schumacher and Villeneuve 2.8 and 4.2 sec adrift respectively. In the laps that followed the running order remained unchanged, while the gap to the McLaren drivers kept growing. It seemed that only Schumacher could threaten them, but on lap five his race came to a premature end as a result of engine failure.

Schumacher?óÔé¼Ôäós demise left McLaren in the league of their own as Villeneuve, the best of the chasers, fell back at a rate of up to three seconds per lap. It was clear that, unless mechanical problems intervened, only the McLaren drivers would have a chance to dispute the victory.

The phantom pit stop

Coulthard never really troubled Hakkinen despite the small gap between them. But in a sudden twist on lap 36 the order was swapped, with Coulthard hitting the front. The most peculiar thing was that Coulthard inherited the lead when Hakkinen inexplicably turned into the pits and drove past the McLaren garage where nobody was waiting for him. It transpired the race leader had misunderstood his engineer warning him about upcoming traffic. Hakkinen was known to have had hearing difficulties since his live-threatening crash at Adelaide in 1995.

Hakkinen?óÔé¼Ôäós excursion down the pit-lane cost his around thirty seconds. But even after having lost so much time he was able to rejoin the race in second position ?óÔé¼ÔÇ£ such was the advantage that the McLaren drivers were enjoying over the opposition on that day. After a few laps he began to catch Coulthard.

The new leader did little to hold Hakkinen back. He was informed by the team that a mistake had occurred and that it was up to him to correct it. Being a true gentleman as well as a team player he let Hakkinen through with fewer than three laps to go.

So what made Coulthard relinquish the lead of the race? The answer to this question became available only after the end of the Grand Prix. Arriving in Melbourne Dennis was aware that his drivers had the fastest car in the field at their disposal. However, unreliability threatened to be the MP4-13?óÔé¼Ôäós Achilles?óÔé¼Ôäó heel and Dennis decided to intervene.

He asked his drivers not to push each other to the limit, urging them to decide the outcome of the race off the track. The two agreed, reaching a consensus that the one to arrive at turn one first would clinch the victory. Having started from pole-position, Hakkinen won the sprint to the first bend. Ironically, had it been not for the Finn?óÔé¼Ôäós mistake, the public would not have known anything about the drivers?óÔé¼Ôäó pre-race agreement.

Accusations that McLaren consistently favoured Hakkinen over Coulthard persisted until Hakkinen?óÔé¼Ôäós retirement at the end of 2001. Perhaps one day, when he has resigned from McLaren for good, Ron Dennis might find some spare time and dedicate it to writing a book about the times he spent at the helm of one of F1?óÔé¼Ôäós most successful outfits.

I, and millions of other passionate F1 fans, would be fascinated to read Dennis?óÔé¼Ôäós take on how this controversial race came about.

15 comments on Domination: the 1998 Australian GP

I remember being there for the 1998 Grand Prix, as an avid DC fan until his retirement last year, I was hopeful he would repeat that 1997 win which saw him be the photo car/driver for the 1998 Aus GP on my bedroom wall.

I recall an uproar at what transpired there, with the phantom stop and relinquishing of the lead back to Mika, but for a young 16 year old F1 fan the impression I had was how sportsmanlike it was of DC and just how well Mika and David respected eachother as team mates.

I hope Ron does write a book as you say, it would make for a very entertaining read, from the Mika/DC years to the Lewis/Nando era.

I remember that race. Waking up early in the morning to see McLaren lapping everybody was so scaring for a Ferrari fan.
I also remember a mysterious “third lever” on McLaren wheel, that was suspected to be the secret of that amazing domination, but I’ve never been sure of what it was exactly.
That domination went on at Interlagos also, then Schumacher managed to fight back until the last race. I think this has been one of the most valuable seasons of Schumacher, because getting to the ultimate against that incredible package (MP4-13, MH and DC!) was a success itself.
Brawn GP supremacy is nothing compared to MP4-13…

There is one more similarity btw 1998 and 2009 that hasn’t been mentioned.
We now have the diffusor controversy regarding Brawns – amongs others.
But then there was a bigger controversy with McLaren – as they supposedly had a (illegal) 4-wheel steering. As it turned out, this was done not by having movable rear wheels, but with controlling the rear breaks seperately, which gave the same effect.
Many suspected this was the reason for McLaren’s domination. FIA banned it, but the McLarens were still as dominant as they were in Australia.
Their lead, however, had been shrinking towards the end of the season.

Keith, I believe the engine was actually a Mecachrome? Per this grandprix.com article, Supertec was only a distributor for the 1998 season; the Supertec variant of the Renault powerplant was being developed for the following season, and Williams opted out of using it.

Michael, you are right. But while the engine’s official name was Mecachrome, most people still referred to it as Supertec, hence the confusion. However, I do believe that this should be changed… Thank you for your attention, I certainly appreciate it.